Review of The 6th Day

The 6th Day (2000)
7/10
Underrated late-period Arnold
14 February 2015
Warning: Spoilers
Released in 2000, "The Sixth Day" does not quite hearken back to Schwarzenegger's glory days of Terminator 2, Predator and the like, but it is a far cry above other late period work like "Last Action Hero." In my opinion this breezy action flick deserves better than a 5.9 on IMDb, and I give it a 7: worth seeing more than once, but not in the 8-10 great movies category.

In the film, Arnold accidentally gets cloned by a business magnate due to a mix-up, and the magnate's henchmen (and women, Sarah Wynter is a great henchwoman) relentlessly pursue him to wipe out the duplicate that could give away their illegal human cloning scheme. As the film progresses, you wonder: who is the clone, and the 'real' person? Does it make a difference? Of course, there's a happy ending for Arnold - and his clone, while the bad guys get dismembered, necks broken, consumed in explosions that tear skyscrapers apart, and all the usual good stuff in Arnie action flicks.

The best part of this film is its script. Perhaps too intricate for some, it is a lovingly written action script that really makes an effort not to have too many plot holes. Even stuff that seems unimportant or a plot hole at first, turns out to be cleverly crafted. Some examples:

The 'real' Arnold has a nick from shaving, which his friend uses to ID the 'real' one. But later we learn the cloners have copied that, too. So who is real?

In passing on the phone, evil magnate Michael Drucker (Tony Goldwyn) mentions "Get me the Speaker (of the house) on the phone." It turns out much later in the film that he invited the Speaker to a gala where he talks about cloning saving cancerous children; the speaker has a son with cancer, and becomes a sucker for making cloning legal.

Likewise, Drucker explains that brains cannot yet be cloned without support from the whole body during cell growth, getting a major pothole out of the way. Likewise, a lot of care is taken to explain the medical 'science' just enough to close plot holes, but not so much that it becomes fake. They even get away pretty well with the idea that clones can be grown from 'unformed' templates by gene infusion to differentiate them within hours. (After all, the plot has to keep moving, and we can't wait for 30 years for the clone of a dead 30 year-old.)

The script and production team also hit the nail on the head with the 'near future' background material: a self-driving car awfully like a Google car, styled slightly futuristically, but just as you might expect something in the year 20XX to look. Taxis that are paid by fingerprint (Apple Pay, anyone). Jet-helicopters; malls with gigantic monorails to move people; super- realistic dolls; refrigerators that order milk when it runs out, but in a normal-looking house. And best, the Re-pet (re-peat, get it?) pet stores that clone your beloved dog or cat so your kids don't suffer anguish when the old dog goes to heaven. The store chain serves as a foil for a bit of bioethics and cloning philosophy. Basically, the world in this movie feels very much like 20XX USA could feel, as opposed to the often overblown futurism in 'near-future' action flicks.

But of course, this IS an action flick, so don't expect deep philosophy here. It moves along fast through a complex but quite self-consistent plot, and an intelligent action fan will enjoy this movie, and the fact that (s)he will have to search just a little harder than usual to find the unavoidable plot holes. If the scriptwriters make me work at it a little bit (and even realize that what I thought is a hole is actually consistent on careful examination!), I am happy.

This is a 7/10 on many levels, for above average complexity, above average consistency, and plenty of action - although the action in this one is pretty mundane. What can I say, more mundane action is actually more realistic, and this is one of the more realistic action films of the 2000s, if there is such a thing as a realistic action film. Can be viewed more than once, and new details will be discovered.
7 out of 10 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed